Mexican Editorial: "The PRD, 1/3 of the 'Simulated Republic' AMLO wants to bring down" (Translation)

La Crónica de Hoy ^ | August 16,2006 | José Carreño Carlón ( translated by self )

[StJacques]

Perredista,¹ one third of the "Simulated Republic" AMLO wants to bring down

Yesterday AMLO invoked constitutional Article 39 with everyone and made his appeal to the "people (who) have at all times the inalienable right of altering or modifying the form of their government."

And he justified his appeal with the example of the Zapata uprising against President Madero, even though the Zapatista "Ayala Plan"² was lauched in 1911, six years before the promulgation of the Constitution of 1917 and the vigorous entrance of its now publicized Article 39.

But this inconsistency (of a grade school history book) is not the only one in his call to a "Democratic National Convention," to be carried out the 16th of September, in the Zocalo capital plaza, against "the imposition of the candidate of the right," whose triumph at the ballot box and whose formal declaration [as the winner of the election] in his favor he no longer discusses.

AMLO has not recognized the work of nearly a million Mexicans of the citizen structure upon which the organization of the elections of July 2 rested, in agreement with the law, and he already anticipated his disqualification by the Electoral Tribunal of the Judicial Power of the Federation, a genuinely appointed legal tribunal conforming to the norms of law.

Nevertheless, yesterday he himself created, by his infallible inspiration, a parallel electoral body: an Organizing National Commission (of his Democratic National convention), and to which he appointed, without the necessity of the vote or ratification of anyone, "Jose Agustin Pinchetti, Jesusa Rodriguez, Rafael Hernandez, Socorro Diaz, and Dante Delgado, among others," as El Universal online recorded last night.

And though the electoral process, which he now does not recognize, began some ten months ago, AMLO will be taking their protest, next September 16, exactly one month after sending out his convention call and appointing his own IFE,³ to those "who will be delegates to the convention: all the elected representatives in popular assemblies in towns, communities, municipalities, and political and social organizations."

But moreover "those municipal presidents, union members, councilmen, local deputies, assemblymen, governors, federal deputies and senators who so desire will be able to participate, as will party militants and municipal directors, national and state parties, and political associations."

His personal IFE will not only accredit elected delegates, it will also handle public relations: "The delegates must themselves be accredited in all the municipal and federative entities before the organizing commission, which will direct invitations to civil personalities, intellectuals, speakers, academics, scientists, and artists of Mexico, as well as to social and political movements and organizations who will participate as observers."

"All the delegates will have the right to speak and vote (to decide the destiny of the 'New Republic'), and those invited only to speak," continuing now to that type of COFIPE⁴ particular to the Caudillo.⁵ "The delegates will have to sign the Agreement of the Rules of the convention "so that they should be legislating as the head of the 'New Republic' at the moment they sign it."

"New Republic," like the Chavista Bolivarian Republic?

It is, in effect the "New Republic," at war against that which they have been given to calling the "Simulated Republic" of today, to which someone should pass a card describing the article following the invoked Article 39, number 40: "It is the will of the Mexican people to constitute themselves in a federal, democratic, representative Republic, composed of free and sovereign states in everything concerning its internal regime; but united in a Federation established according to the principles of this Fundamental Law." If other articles of the Constitution have passed him by, AMLO could have fixed this by only looking to Article 41 which establishes that "The people exercise their sovereignty by means of the Powers of the Union," but then perhaps it would have made sense that, only with respect to one of these Powers of the Union, the Legislative, does his party control the third part of each one of the two chambers [of the Mexican Congress], in this "Simulated Republic" which he now is disposed to bring down.

Its high participation within the old "Simulated Republic" must also be due to the fact that, by agreement with the same article, "the renovation of the Legislative and Executive powers is carried out by means of free, authentic, and periodic elections. . ." such as those in which AMLO and his party this year obtained a little more than a third part of the votes.

But scarcely had he sent out the summons for the "New Republic," in the manner in which Hugo Chavez imposed on Venezuela with the name of "Bolivarian Republic," than his movement was faced with important desertions, and also the surprise in which the Fox government gives evidence that it wants to govern, as shown in the deeds at San Lazaro and the statements of the President to the New York Times yesterday.⁶

The majority of the evening newscasts yesterday gave great importance to the statements of Fox to the Times, reported last night by the Consultants in Media Information and Analysis (CIAM). There followed the versions on the daily radio shows. [The newspaper] Reforma's online service titled its note: "Fox indicates he will assume his responsibility as President if after the resolution of the TRIFE⁷ social conflict is aggravated in the country."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Translator's Notes:

¹A Perredista is a member of Lopez Obrador's PRD (Party of the Democratic Revolution) party.

²The "Ayala Plan" was Emiliano Zapata's 1911 plan for agrarian land reform which was a major focus of the Mexican Revolution, especially in the south of the country, where Lopez Obrador and the PRD are strongest today.

³Acronym for the Instituto Federal Electoral, the "Federal Electoral Institute," the official organ of the Mexican government that handled the counting of votes in the July 2 presidential election.

⁴COFIPE is an acronym for Código Federal de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales or the "Federal Code of Institutions and Electoral Procedures."

⁵The Spanish word Caudillo, which directly translates as "leader," is usually used, and in this case in a derogatory sense, to refer to an authoritarian politician. Francisco Franco was known as El Caudillo.

⁶This refers to the crackdown of the Federal Preventive Police at the grounds of the national legislature at San Lazaro and President Vicente Fox's interview with the New York Times in which he made clear that he is prepared to assume "his responsibility as President" if the impending decision of the Electoral Tribunal "aggravates social conflict in the country."

⁷Acronym for the Tribunal Electoral Federal, a common shorthand name for Mexico's Electoral Tribunal.

[StJacques]

I wanted to translate this particular editorial because, in my opinion, it gives everyone a very good look into AMLO's brain. What leaped out at me when reading this is how determined AMLO is to organize the Mexican state and Mexican society according to his own impulses and how, even though he uses the rhetoric of democracy, just how truly authoritarian he is in fact.

If it were not for the fact that AMLO has shown himself to be a very capable political organizer, I would say that the above indicates that he is lost in a fantasy world in which he commands political change and everyone follows along in popular agreement. It seems to me that the man just will not face up to reality.

But then I say that about the Left in so many other cases that maybe I'm just revealing my own prejudice.

[StJacques]

A Mex-Elex ping for you all.

Anyone wishing to track the other translated articles I have put up on the Mexican post-election controversy can retrieve them using the forum's "keyword" search with the unique keyword -- STJTRANSLATION

[StJacques]

"La Cronica is a conservative newspaper."

Yes it is, and I am becoming increasingly amazed at how strongly a body of articulate conservative thought has developed within Mexico over the past twenty years or so. This is a lot different than when I was down there in the 1980's, when just about everything was leftist dribble.

[A CA Guy]

Thanks, and good work.

[xcamel]

It's starting to seem like he was fished out of the shallow end of Che's gene pool.

I'm still holding all plans to go back to Lapaz until this all shakes out. The last thing I need is to be stuck in MX in the middle of some half-assed revolution.

[GeronL]

Thanks. You don't need to post updates as often as you do, your putting in too much time. Maybe there's a volunteerism tax credit out there for you.

[StJacques]

"You don't need to post updates as often as you do, your putting in too much time"

Well I appreciate the consideration. There have been at least three days out of the last ten in which I didn't start a new thread because I've been somewhat busy with my work. That has actually held true over the past two days as well and I will admit that I'm approaching burnout at the moment, but I've followed this whole thing so closely and, given that I think this "national democratic convention" of AMLO's portends for real trouble, I just cannot let it pass without a good look. But as far as my work goes, I expect my personal load to lighten up a bit after tomorrow, when I will complete a contract. I may end up doing absolutely nothing for about the ensuing three days, though the grass in my yard is laughing at me right now.

[GeronL]

OK. Just don't work too hard.

[JCEccles]

You are doing an amazing job on this. You are way ahead of anyone else on the web.

[sockmonkey]

I rely on your updates for news on this..Babelfish doesn't cut it, and the MSM in the US seems to think it's not newsworthy.

So, once again, Thanks for all your hard work.

[norton]

May disagree with you, but thanks for the work and for making it a bit easier on the rest of us...who also have day jobs.

I'm guessing that this indicates that somehow, sometime (soon), someone plans on violence.

Be interesting to see it the man gets somehow disappeared by his own folks or by some fortunate accident.

Or just...disappeared.

Either way, I do NOT see a friendly government emerging and I already believe the masses to be indoctrinated into loathing for the USA.
(Yes, despite their general desire to BE in the USA)

[rovenstinez]

I tip my sombrero to you too. Latest word is that PRD suggests that some thugs have penetrated their ranks and are of the surly sort that might make trouble.... I wonder how much they bribed these thugs to penetrate their ranks?

[StJacques]

"Either way, I do NOT see a friendly government emerging and I already believe the masses to be indoctrinated into loathing for the USA."

I could point you to some editorials in Spanish in which they quote Lopez Obrador for ridiculing PAN and its supporters "for liking the gringos and their way of life," something that he does repeatedly in speeches.

I do not expect Calderon to give us everything we want, so in the sense that we will ask for stricter measures to curtail illegal immigration, I see difficulties ahead. But, as I have said repeatedly, if Calderon gets his any significant amount of his reform policies enacted, he will need us, and that need will define a complex of "mutual interests" between our two countries. It will be a process of "give and take," that does not exist now because Fox could never get his reform program, which admittedly has not been as ambitious as the one Calderon wants to pursue, enacted into law. Fox never "needed" the U.S., so it was never in his interest to "deal" with us at the bargaining table. I'm hoping Calderon approaches that table under a different set of circumstances. And, by the way, there are NO circumstances under which AMLO would "need" us, so it's clearly in our interest to support Calderon. We have ourselves to look out for most of all.

[Shuttle Shucker]

Having a 3 party system enables at least one party to focus on core conservative ideals. It's when you need 50% or more of the vote to win that dilution occurs, as with today's GOP here in the states.

[Shuttle Shucker]

>>>And, by the way, there are NO circumstances under which AMLO would "need" us, <<<

He did publish in the New York Times pleading for Leftists' support worldwide. But clearly if he had a choice between an open country where criticism from abroad could undermine his authoritarian ways, and a continuingly impoverished one where he's boss, the latter would more likely appeal to his syphillis-infected / cysticercos-plagued brain.

In other news, Evo Morales now has postage stamps of himself being distributed in Bolivia. And even on his deathbed, Fidel's still a billionaire while the Cuban masses rot in poverty and the bliss of ignorance.

[StJacques]

You know, as I read AMLO running on about calling a convention, appointing organizing committees, designating which public officials will be able to attend as voting members of the convention, which ones will be invited to attend only as observers, describing the procedures by which the convention rules will be signed, and so on and so on; I'm reminded of a little kid who enjoys sitting around and "playing pretend." The guy is deluded beyond words. I mean, I truly do question his sanity.

[norton]

Ummm...

Think Calderon might change the lesson plans in mexican schools to drop the "gringos stole our land", and "gringos exploit our labor", and "gringos killed off our ancestors" part?

Think maybe they'd admit that the Aztecs never got to Santa Fe but the Spanish did, happily enslaving the locals; then handed them management so they (mexico) could pi$$ it away?

(Doubt it)

[norton]

Point is:

Indoctrination.

I deal with it every time my neighbors' kids return from visiting relatives in Baja.

[StJacques]

Well I definitely object to the "gringos killed off our ancestors" part, though the real form in which they make that argument is "the white men killed off our ancestors."

As for the "gringos exploit our labor," well, I think that's a real big part of the problem we ourselves have with American farm enterprises who hire illegal immigrants so they do not have to pay scale, so even I believe that.

And finally, the "gringos stole our land." Well, not Texas, because that was a democratic revolution that achieved independence and voluntarily joined our union. That's part of their accusation and the Mexicans and I are just going to flat out disagree on that. But as for everything else we acquired in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo; to be honest, we bribed Mexican government officials, ambassadors, legislators, and more to get the treaty passed, not to mention the fact that we occupied the area on our own during the Mexican War. So I would say simply that the Mexicans mismanaged the whole affair so badly that "we stole it fair and square."

You have to be careful about the teaching of history. Not all of what the Mexicans claim is without basis.

[norton]

"Not all of what the Mexicans claim is without basis."

a. That's why my grandmother hated Germans.
And,
b. Life ain't fair.

Difference is that US schools do NOT teach that all Germans are Nazis and responsible for the death of someone's son...
mexican schools DO teach that every citizen of mexico was robbed by America.
(When you use 'white man' you betray the fact that the mexican 'race' is half european but the mexican myth is indio - and 'indio' is despised by mexican society)

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Life ain't fair.

You can fantisize as you wish about going back in history and doing things different - but of course

1. No one can do that, and
2. According to the "butterfly effect" neither you nor I would be alive today if anything had been different 150 years ago.

We plan the future only in its broadest general outlines, and things don't even go as we plan them even within our own lifetimes. If my greatgrandfather hadn't been wounded in the head in the Civil War - or if that wound had been fatal, as any head wound is pretty close to being - how would he have subsequently met and married my greatgrandmother?

And, if not, obviously I wouldn't be typing but how many other geneologies would be different if my greatgrandmother had subsequently married someone else? She would have had a different mix of sons and daughters. And what effect would that have had on other peoples' lives, causing differences in their own geneologies? No, if that bullet had gone just slightly differently I wouldn't be here - but you wouldn't be there, either. History generally might look no different - but it's hard to fathom who might be alive today instead of those of us who are actually here. Probabilities would seem to suggest that no one now living would in fact be alive today.

All for a slight difference in the aim of a single rifle shot - in a war in which there were millions of shots fired in anger.

Historical resentments are vanity.

[norton]

And the purpose of your comment was??

My point was that mexicans have been taught, in school and at home, that our ancestors stole from theirs & the fantasy that they deserve to take the land and all its new accessories 'back' for mexico/aztlan or whatever is strong below the border.
Most of them believe that they have rights here because this territory was temporarily mexican - quite temporarily in fact.
And my grandmother (and mother) DID hate Germans her entire life because of WW2 - not Hitler or a group of Germans defending their bridge, but all Germans.
She had a better reason to do so but it was pointless and even self destructive nonetheless.

Finally, no I do not place myself in that same category; (not to coinf a phrase, but) "some of my best friends are....)
But I do believe that mexico itself must change and that today it is an enemy, just as I think Islam is an enemy requiring huge amounts of internal change before it or any of its proponents can be trusted.
Note for record simple proof is that Lebanese Christians don't like Israel or Jews any more than their muslim neighbors do, Christians in that region are not much less prone to individual violence as are muslims. So far, however, I think that the record of Christian suicide bombers is tied with that of Jewish suicide bombers - both at zero.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

I wrote:"Historical resentments are vanity."

By that I mean that if 150 years ago things had happened the way you now think would have been "right," you wouldn't be here. And that is true whether you are American, Mexican, or whatever. It's wrong to teach Mexican kids that Mexico should rule Oklahoma just as it would be wrong to teach American kids that Mexicans are inferior and the US should rule Mexico.

If it comes to that, Mexicans can't agree on who is the president-elect of Mexico - what business would they have telling me that whoever that turns out to be should also be president of Oklahoma?

[untenured]

But, as I have said repeatedly, if Calderon gets his any significant amount of his reform policies enacted, he will need us, and that need will define a complex of "mutual interests" between our two countries.

Do you know what his reform agenda is? And what chance he has of getting it through Parliament, which as I understand it balked at what Mr. Fox wanted to do?

[Shuttle Shucker]

A blip on the radar? Or the international Leftist establishment begins to wake up?

http://www.el-universal.com.mx/notas/369370.html

[StJacques]

"Do you know what his reform agenda is? And what chance he has of getting it through Parliament, which as I understand it balked at what Mr. Fox wanted to do?"

untenured, I'm pinging Shuttle Shucker on this post as an observer, since he and I have been discussing the very question you raise across numerous posts over the last few weeks.

First of all; here is an introductory article on Calderon and his ideas.

Yes; I do know the broad outlines of what Calderon wants to do and I can state that due to the fact that there was a major shakeup in the composition of the Mexican Congress in this election, that Calderon's chances of getting most of his reform agenda passed are much better than Fox's ever were.

Calderon's major proposals are to privatize the nation's petroleum industry (wants to increase revenues for the national government, Mexico is a big oil producer), limit federal government subsidies for the national electricity monopoly to cover only the poorest Mexicans (to cut costs, and in contrast to Lopez Obrador's call for much larger subsidies), implement banking and financial reforms to permit the expansion of the financial sector (esp. foundation of new banks and lending institutions) as well as providing more equitable access to credit for all Mexicans (eliminate the "based on who you know" qualification that now governs credit access), expanded government investment in education (esp. infrastructure -- building new schools, buying more textbooks and equipment for poorer schools, teacher pay raises), and fiscal responsibility (Vicente Fox eliminated 20% of Mexico's national debt -- not deficit, outright debt). And with respect to the petroleum industry and electricity reforms, he wants to streamline their production, because they are both little more than "job factories" right now, which leads to a lot of corruption.

With the exception of the privatization of the Mexican oil monopoly, Fox wanted to do most of these, especially the financial sector reforms, but was blocked by the PRI dominated national legislature. The PRI controlled both houses of the Mexican Congress and they basically decided to sabotage Fox's attempts to implement his program so that they could present themselves to the voters as "the party who can get things done" in this year's elections. But they were the really big losers this time around. In the upcoming national legislature the PRI will now be the smallest of the "big three" parties, as shown in the following percentage distribution table of the proportionate representation in both houses of the Mexican Congress accorded to the major parties.

CONGRESS RESULTS

Chamber of deputies: 500 seats

National Action Party (PAN): 34.2%

For the Good of All Coalition (PRD): 29.3%

Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI): 26.6%

New Alliance: 4.9%

Social-Democratic and Rural Alternative Party: 2.3%

Senate: 128 seats

National Action Party (PAN): 34.5%

For the Good of All Coalition (PRD): 30.1%

Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI): 26.4%

New Alliance: 4.3%

Social-Democratic and Rural Alternative Party: 2.1%

As you can see, the PRI is now 3rd and it really comes down to whether the PRI forms an alliance with the Leftist PRD or with the Conservative PAN Party. The early indications are that they will align themselves with PAN. The PRI cannot afford to have the Mexican people continue to see them in the negative light they expressed in the recent election and that means they must choose. Just last week the PAN and New Alliance candidates for the office of Governor of the state of Chiapas both pulled out and endorsed the PRI candidate -- they want to stop the PRD -- and many PRI spokesmen and elected officials have been very critical of Lopez Obrador and his post-election protests. So there is reason to hope.

Obviously there are going to be problems for Calderon, and it is doubtful that he can get everything he wants with respect to his proposals to modernize the petroleum industry -- though I do believe he can get some of it through, but the entire legislative environment within which he will work is dramatically different from that which Fox faced. We'll see.

[StJacques]

Definitely the "international Leftist establishment" waking up, and especially the "Looney California Leftist Establishment."

You can read who Global Exchange is at this link:

http://www.oriononline.org/pages/ogn/vieworg.cfm?action=one&ogn_org_ID=629

Here is the abstract description of the organization:

"Global Exchange is a non-profit research, education, and action center working for global political, economic, environmental, and social justice. Since our founding in 1988, we have worked to increase the US public's awareness of global issues while building progressive, grassroots international partnerships."

They are something of a "green" organization and their use of the word "progressive" above is a dead giveaway as to their agenda, in my opinion.

Here is the bulleted list of their "objectives":

---

Global Exchange pursues these goals through six program areas:

• Political and Civil Rights Campaigns, which complement the traditional human rights organization's observation and monitoring work with activities aimed at directly empowering grassroots human rights movements within our target countries of Mexico, Colombia, Guatemala, Brazil, and the Middle East;
  
  
• Economic Rights Campaigns, which struggle for the elimination of sweatshop abuses, monitor corporate behavior, and challenge global rule-makers such as the World Trade Organization and the International Monetary Fund;
  
  
• Fair Trade, which helps build economic justice from the bottom up through the sale of handicrafts that generate income for artisans in over 37 countries;
  
  
• Public Education, which produces books, videos, arti-cles, and editorials and organizes educational workshops and nationwide speaking tours that bring community leaders from around the world to the US to educate citizens on critical global issues;
  
  
• Exploring California, which engages Californians in solution-oriented dialogue on issues such as immigration, treatment of laborers, and the environment; and
  
  
• Reality Tours, which educate the public about domestic and international issues through socially responsible travel.

---

The "dead giveaways" in the above are "Fair Trade" -- as opposed to "Free Trade" -- and note that in the previous item they say their intention is to "challenge global rule-makers such as the World Trade Organization and the International Monetary Fund," which reads to me like "we're going to fight the international capitalist conspiracy," and the "Reality Tours," which implies to me that they see their role as educating everyone about what "social responsibility" truly is, which catches in my throat very quickly.

I don't give these guys a second thought.

[Shuttle Shucker]

I think the only things I'd add to that great analysis are:

***The PRI was reportedly influenced by former president (and former presidential candidate in 2006) Roberto Madrazo to sabotage Fox whenever possible. Esther Gordillo, a prominent union boss who left the PRI, said as much. With Madrazo out of the picture and the recent electoral spanking that the PRI received for acquiescing to such an egotist, the PRI is less stubborn. Meanwhile, Felipe's an attorney and mild mannered whereas Fox is a gruff Coca-Cola salesman (who fired Felipe a couple years ago). Not too many in the PAN are that crazy about Fox anyway; he didn't win the party's nomination in 2000 by a primary or anything; they didn't want to dilute their support when they figured they likely wouldn't win anyway.

***With petro prices being what they are, and Mexico's lack of involvement in the Middle East, it's understandable (albeit admirable) that they reduced their foreign debt. It's at 24% of GDP whereas ours is at 70% (and growing). Ah if only we had a 3 party system like the Mexicans do, so the conservative party could focus on pleasing its base and STILL get elected.

[Shuttle Shucker]

They date as far back as 1988, huh? Gee. :-)

[Shuttle Shucker]

I did not mean to imply, though, that I admire Mexico's pacifistic ways. They can't even control the mess in their own borders. And they conveniently (and lazily) criticize those who clean up messes outside of Mexico, afor not being pacifistic enough.